NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 2 Literature Search
- High Quality FPX Sample Assessment
- Step-by-Step Guide to master FPX Assessment
- References (APA Format) for related Assessments
- Connect with Top professors for specific class
- Detailed (FAQs) related to Assessment.
- Express Delivery with in 24 hours.
Assessment Overview:
This assessment NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 2 is your first step in creating an evidence base for doctoral design. Your notes offer a comprehensive overview of the literature regarding the use of cognitive behavioral remedy (CBT) and motivational canvassing ways to treat opioid dependence. The thing is to restate your comprehensive exploration strategy and findings into a professional document that demonstrates your scholarly moxie.
How to Pass NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 2 Literature Search
- Start Strong: Explain the goal of your literature search and its relevance to your PICOT question.
- Detail Your Strategy: Name databases, keywords, MeSH terms, Boolean operators, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and publication timeframe.
- Justify Selection: Explain why each study was included or excluded; emphasize quality and relevance.
- Examine the Evidence: Clearly summarize the results, point out how well CBT and motivational interviewing worked, and mention any gaps in long-term outcomes or diverse populations.
- Link to Your Design: Show how your findings support your intervention and how your DNP project addresses existing gaps.
- Organize Visually: Use tables/charts to summarize studies and key findings for quick reference.
- Conclude Effectively: Synthesize the evidence, reiterating relevance to patient outcomes and your proposed project.
- Reference Accurately: Use current, peer-reviewed, credible sources in APA format to strengthen your scholarly argument.
Sample Assessment:
Literature Search
The literature hunt for this design aimed to assess the effectiveness of personalized cognitive behavioral remedy (CBT) and motivational canvassing for cases with opioid dependence. A methodical and strategic approach was espoused, exercising several scholarly databases, including PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library. These databases were named for their trustworthiness in offering high-quality exploration in the healthcare and psychology disciplines. The hunt was guided by keywords and expressions applicable to the PICOT question, such as opioid dependence, cognitive behavioral remedy, motivational canvassing, customer-centered treatment, and readmission rates. Boolean drivers similar to “AND” and “OR” were employed to combine hunt terms, while pollutants for peer-reviewed papers and recent publications were used to upgrade results (Hah et al., 2020). This strategy aimed to detect the most material studies that assess the impact of these interventions on reducing readmission rates in cases with opioid dependence.
Literature Search Strategy
To identify applicable studies, a combination of strategies was employed. Crucial terms, including Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), similar to opioid-affiliated diseases, cognitive behavioral remedy, and motivational interviewing, were used to enhance hunt particularity. Also, reviewing reference lists of linked studies helped uncover supplementary coffers. This comprehensive approach ensured that studies published in the last five years were included. Additional criteria concentrated on exploration involving adult cases with substance use diseases who entered personalized CBT and motivational canvassing, with readmission rates as an outgrowth. Studies not in English, those involving children, and explorations with inadequate methodological rigor were barred. Likewise, Argentine literature, including government reports and compositions, was considered when peer-reviewed sources were scarce (DeBar et al., 2021). Eventually, 20 to 30 high-quality sources were named for in-depth analysis to maintain a robust and up-to-date substantiation base.
Analysis of Evidence
An analysis of the 20 named peer-reviewed papers handed precious perceptivity into the effectiveness of CBT and motivational canvassing in treating opioid dependence. The studies employed colorful methodologies, including randomized controlled trials and methodical reviews, to estimate issues similar to reduced readmission rates and better internal health. Crucial findings revealed that both CBT and motivational canvassing were effective in managing opioid dependence and co-occurring psychiatric conditions similar to anxiety and depression (Buckner et al., 2023; McHugh et al., 2024). Despite these promising issues, gaps remained in understanding the long-term goods of these interventions, as well as their effectiveness across different demographic groups. Likewise, exploration emphasized the need to consider cost-effectiveness and the delivery modality of these curatives in different healthcare settings (MacLean et al., 2024; Olmstead et al., 2020).Make your assignment stand out — see our professionally crafted NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 2 Literature Search for reference.
NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 2 Literature Search
Borsari, B., Li, Y., Tighe, J., Manuel, J. K., Gökbayrak, N. S., Delucchi, K., Morasco, B. J., Abadjian, L., Cohen, B. E., Baxley, C., & Seal, K. H. (2021). A pilot trial of collaborative care with motivational interviewing to reduce opioid risk and improve chronic pain management. Addiction, 116(9). https://doi.org/10.1111/add.15401
Buckner, J. D., Scherzer, C. R., Crapanzano, K. A., & Morris, P. E. (2023). Group cognitive behavioral therapy for substance use disorders among psychiatric inpatients in a medically underserved area: An intervention for opioid misuse. Public Health Reports, 138(1_suppl), 90S–95S. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549231170219
Buckner, J. D., Walukevich-Dienst, K., Crapanzano, K. A., Tucker, R. P., & Tynes, L. L. (2021). Brief motivational interviewing–based interventions for opioid misuse in hospital settings. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 7(2), 114–129. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000280
DeBar, L., Mayhew, M., Benes, L., Bonifay, A., Deyo, R. A., Elder, C. R., Keefe, F. J., Leo, M. C., McMullen, C., Owen-Smith, A., Smith, D. H., Trinacty, C. M., & Vollmer, W. M. (2021). A primary care–based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for long-term opioid users with chronic pain. Annals of Internal Medicine, 175(1). https://doi.org/10.7326/m21-1436
NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 2 Literature Search
Hah, J. M., Trafton, J. A., Narasimhan, B., Krishnamurthy, P., Hilmoe, H., Sharifzadeh, Y., Huddleston, J. I., Amanatullah, D., Maloney, W. J., Goodman, S., Carroll, I., & Mackey, S. C. (2020). Efficacy of motivational interviewing and guided opioid tapering support for patients undergoing orthopedic surgery (MI-Opioid Taper): A prospective, assessor-blind, randomized controlled pilot trial. EClinicalMedicine, 28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100596
References (APA 7 Format)
- Amin, M., Reza Davasaz Irani, F., Fattahi, P., & Pakseresht, S. (2023). goods of brief cognitive behavioral remedy on internal health in substance-related complaints The study was conducted as a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-023-05413-4
- Bertholet, N., Meli, S., Palfai, T. P., Cheng, D. M., Alford, D. P., Bernstein, J., Samet, J. H., Lloyd-Travaglini, C., & Saitz, R. (2020). Netting and brief intervention for lower-trouble drug use in primary care A birdman randomized trial. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 213, 108001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108001
Rubric Breakdown
| Rubric Criteria | Requirement to Pass |
| Introduction & Purpose | Clearly define the purpose of the literature search: evaluating CBT and motivational interviewing for opioid dependence and readmission reduction. |
| Search Strategy | Specify databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane), keywords/MeSH terms, Boolean operators, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and timeframe (last 5 years). |
| Selection Criteria | Include only peer-reviewed studies on adults, written in English, with sufficient methodological rigor; justify exclusions. |
| Evidence Analysis & Synthesis | Summarize key findings cohesively, noting the effectiveness of interventions and identifying gaps (long-term outcomes, demographic variations, cost-effectiveness). |
| Connection to PICOT/Design | Clearly link findings to your DNP project, showing how evidence supports the intervention and addresses knowledge gaps. |
| Presentation & Organization | Use tables or charts to organize sources; provide clear headings, logical flow, and professional formatting. |
| Conclusion | Provide a synthesis summarizing overall findings, effectiveness of interventions, and relevance to your proposed DNP project. |
| References & Credibility | Include current, credible, peer-reviewed sources, properly cited in APA style. |
Step-by-Step Guide
- Define Your Hunt Strategy Start by explaining the regular approach you took. Your notes are a great resource for this, mentioning pivotal rudiments like
- Databases: List the specific databases you used, similar to PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, and explain why they were applicable for your content.
- Keywords and Drivers State the keywords and MeSH terms you used (opioid dependence, CBT, motivational canvassing) and how you combined them with Boolean operators (AND, OR) to upgrade your quest.
- Addition/Rejection Criteria Detail the criteria you used to select your papers. This section is a vital step that shows your quest was rigorous and focused. For illustration, your notes mention including only peer-reviewed studies on grown-ups and banning non-English papers.
- dissect and synthesize the substantiation This section is the core of your assessment. You need to go beyond simply listing what each composition set up and produce a cohesive narrative.
- crucial findings Your notes correctly identify that both CBT and motivational canvassing are effective for treating opioid dependence and co-occurring internal health issues.
- Identify the Gaps A critical part of designing a DNP is to relate the gaps in current substantiation. Your notes do this well by pointing out the need for further disquisition on
- The long-term salutary goods of these interventions require further disquisition.
- Your notes effectively further probe on the long-term goods of these interventions, as well as their effectiveness across different demographic groups.
- The study also focuses on the cost-effectiveness and delivery modalities of these interventions.
- Connect to Your Design Always link your findings back to design. For the case, you could explain that while the validation supports your proposed intervention, the linked gaps highlight areas where your design can contribute new, precious perceptivity.
- Use the Table Format The table you’ve handed in is an excellent way to epitomize your quest and analysis. Fill it out with the details you’ve formerly gathered to give a clear, at-a-glance overview of your work.
- Conclude with a Synthesis End your document with a strong summary. Reiterate the effectiveness of your proposed interventions grounded on the literature you have reviewed. Emphasize that your design will be predicated on the substantiation gathered to address the specific knowledge gaps you have linked, thereby contributing to the overall body of knowledge.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Why is it important to have a regular literature quest strategy?
A regular quest strategy is vital because it ensures your findings are comprehensive, unbiased, and normal. It provides a clear, documented process for how you set up your validation, which is a hallmark of scholarly inquiry and a pivotal element of validation-predicated practice.
Q What is the difference between a literature quest and a literature review?
A literature quest is the process of finding and collecting scholarly sources. A literature review is the process of synthesizing and assaying those sources to make an argument or present a comprehensive overview of the content. This assessment focuses on both, but a deeper dive into the review will come after the assessment.
Q How does this assessment prepare me for my doctoral design?
NURS FPX 9902 Assessment 2 is the foundational step. It teaches you how to effectively discover, estimate, and synthesize scholarly validation. These chops are essential for every part of your DNP design, from justifying your intervention to assessing its issues and propagating your findings.
Integrity Note
Note: Only use this assessment example for learning and structure purpose. Do not submit as your own work.
We are an independent resource and are not affiliated with Capella University.